ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Down

Author Topic: Network Robustness - Dante  (Read 3911 times)

Jelmer de Jong

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 171
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #20 on: February 09, 2019, 06:20:28 pm »

According to Audinate you should not use STP as it takes upwards of a minute to resolve a broken connection. Even RSTP takes around 10 seconds. Audinate's redundancy is seamless. Cisco default timing settings for STP work out this way too. So if ditching the secondary as the back up is the answer... go with analog or AES. It will be about a 1 second drop. As always, correct me if I'm wrong... nicely.

For switch to switch ports I agree with you (and Audinate), but on device ports it can really help you in case a single device reverts itself to defaults and links everything together. The latest Shure Axient has a three way split mode to get control and Dante A/B to three different ports on the receiver. If this is accidentally set to switched mode it can take down your entire network what can only be resolved by a power cycle on every network device. Been there with a LM44 who was on the wrong setting 500 feet away... :'(
Logged

Jonathan Hiemberg

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 280
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #21 on: February 13, 2019, 12:11:03 pm »

As a relatively new user of Dante this thread has me a little concerned about some upcoming changes. Specifically, the ability of a Dante card failure in one device to adversely affect the rest of the network.


I have an install with iLive in the rack, will be changing out to Dante equipped amps (Powersoft X & T) in the same room. This is a permanent install. What would be the advantages of using Dante instead of analog XLR for audio from iLive to the amps? My original plan was two independent Dante networks (A & B) on independent switches.


It seems the analog is the closest to 'failure proof' of the two. I guess the issue comes down to the quality of the conversions (DA out of iLive, then AD/DA in the amps).


Question: in an installation setting where the amps are in the next rack over from your mixer frame, what are the advantages of using Dante for mains signal transport? Do they outweigh any potential downsides?


On the other hand, is it possible to set up the analog connection as the fail-safe? If Dante fails the amps switch automatically to the analog inputs?


If this is better in a new thread, I apologize - I can move it.
Logged

Craig Hauber

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 636
  • Mondak Sound Design - Plentywood MT/Grenora ND
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #22 on: February 13, 2019, 01:25:33 pm »

Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
What is the make&model of the amp?
-or is there an NDA or other reason you can't reveal it.

(Could be useful for those of us choosing gear and designing systems)
Logged
Craig Hauber
Mondak Sound Design
-Live PA
-Installs
-Theatre

David Sturzenbecher

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Online Online
  • Posts: 1686
  • So. Dak.
    • Sturz Audio
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #23 on: February 13, 2019, 02:35:06 pm »

What is the make&model of the amp?
-or is there an NDA or other reason you can't reveal it.

(Could be useful for those of us choosing gear and designing systems)

The amplifiers were Powersoft X series.   They have been solid since the amplifier was replaced, for the third time.

To answer Johnathans question, you can have analog backup setup on the X series, the only kicker, is that if you use more then one dante channel, say one for CH1-2, and another for CH3-4, you need a physical Y cable for your analog backup signal. If you have an X8 and have a discrete dante input for each channel, you need 8 analog inputs for analog backup to work.
Logged
Audio Systems Design Engineer
Daktronics, Inc.
CTS-D, CTS-I
AES Full Member

Helge A Bentsen

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 885
  • Oslo, Norway.
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #24 on: February 13, 2019, 03:06:28 pm »

As a relatively new user of Dante this thread has me a little concerned about some upcoming changes. Specifically, the ability of a Dante card failure in one device to adversely affect the rest of the network.


I have an install with iLive in the rack, will be changing out to Dante equipped amps (Powersoft X & T) in the same room. This is a permanent install. What would be the advantages of using Dante instead of analog XLR for audio from iLive to the amps? My original plan was two independent Dante networks (A & B) on independent switches.


It seems the analog is the closest to 'failure proof' of the two. I guess the issue comes down to the quality of the conversions (DA out of iLive, then AD/DA in the amps).


Question: in an installation setting where the amps are in the next rack over from your mixer frame, what are the advantages of using Dante for mains signal transport? Do they outweigh any potential downsides?


On the other hand, is it possible to set up the analog connection as the fail-safe? If Dante fails the amps switch automatically to the analog inputs?


If this is better in a new thread, I apologize - I can move it.

I have an installation with X and Q-amps, it's been rock solid with only a single Dante network.
We did it on Dante due to lower latency and keeping it all digital for as long as possible.
I'we wired an AES and two analog inputs on the X so if someone shows up with a non-Dante console they can still patch in.
 
The X function as Dante distributor, so if someone wish to run AES/analog signals they go into the X who distributes Dante to the rest of the amps.
Logged

Steven Barnes

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 232
    • SBTS Inc.
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #25 on: February 13, 2019, 04:30:51 pm »

It would be preferable to use static addresses. DHCP is seldom your friend in networks of this type/usage.

I am wondering if statically assigning everything would be a way around this.

Theoretically if you have a NIC with dual interfaces that are both statically assigned with no DHCP server on either of the VLANs, when the card reset itself it would have a self-assigned IP address versus one on either of the Primary or Secondary networks. The device would fall offline, but it wouldn't take down the Dante network. 

Logged
Audio Engineering, Design, Consulting
SBTS Inc.
www.sbts-inc.com

Aram Piligian

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 87
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #26 on: February 13, 2019, 06:40:37 pm »

I am wondering if statically assigning everything would be a way around this.

Theoretically if you have a NIC with dual interfaces that are both statically assigned with no DHCP server on either of the VLANs, when the card reset itself it would have a self-assigned IP address versus one on either of the Primary or Secondary networks. The device would fall offline, but it wouldn't take down the Dante network.

When the card theoretically 'resets itself' to a link-local address and daisy-chain mode, it'll still link primary and secondary networks together and every other device will start throwing 'Primary and Secondary Networks Are On The Same Network' errors and likely stop cooperating.  Dante hardware devices can 'see' across subnets; if primary and secondary are connected to the same network, that will be recognized, regardless of any ip address settings.  Computers running Controller/Via/DVS can only see devices in the same subnet.
Logged

Andrew Hollis

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 113
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #27 on: February 14, 2019, 10:29:46 am »

Turns out a dante card in one of the amplifiers had gone bad, and changed itself to switched mode instead of redundant, connecting the primary and backup networks together.

Is there any way to prevent this from happening in the future?

Yes, the manufacturer should design products with redundant as the default/resting state! There's no other way than that.

brian maddox

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2475
  • HeyYahWon! ttsss! ttsss!
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #28 on: February 14, 2019, 05:05:44 pm »

Yes, the manufacturer should design products with redundant as the default/resting state! There's no other way than that.

^^THIS!!!!
Logged
"It feels wrong to be in the audience.  And it's too peopley!" - Steve Smith

brian maddox
bdmaudio@gmail.com

'...do not trifle with the affairs of dragons...

       ....for you are crunchy, and taste good with ketchup...'

Phillip Ivan Pietruschka

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 42
Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2019, 03:41:52 am »

I would contend there are only specific cases were a redundant network are genuinely worth while. Those being environments that require true 24/7/365 uptime (and the ability to maintain the network without suffering downtime); such as a tv station master control; and those environments where the cable infrastructure is liable to be damaged, such as some concerts, festivals, etc.

For a permanent install that does not require 24/7/365 uptime, then putting money in properly installed and certified cabling, proper cooling and data centre grade switches is probably going to result in a more reliable and cost effective system.

In addition to this, with dante, many small end point devices don't support redundancy, so once you start integrating those the extent to which a system is even capable of being redundant diminishes proportionally.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2019, 06:39:09 am by Phillip Ivan Pietruschka »
Logged

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: Network Robustness - Dante
« Reply #29 on: February 17, 2019, 03:41:52 am »


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4   Go Up
 



Page created in 0.051 seconds with 24 queries.